Nasher

Four changes are unlikely, I'd have thought.

Not a regular reader apparently, and he was disappointed that @Deestroy Allplagiarized his joke.

Fair suck of the sav, Steve, you're as guilty as any. You recently described OMac as a player with no strengths - how can that possibly be true for *any* player on an AFL list, let alone one who is a regular player in a competent team? I think any person that watches as much footy as we tragics do is going to become biased over time and will only start seeing what they already believe to be true. The only difference between you and I is that I recognise the role bias plays when analysing from the outer and you don't. Joeboy's analysis of Tyson in this thread isn't even a single game analysis, it's a three word declaration of where his bias lies.

You're not suggesting that players can be things other than perfect or a dud are you?

Turns out it's in: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2017-05-24/vfl-player-review-round-six Melksham might take the place of Salem, where I had earmarked Stretch. Raffle it between ANB (dominant this week) or Harmes (dominant last week) for Kent - I don't have a preference who. Look forward to the day when we're not trying to decide which NQR to pick for the last spot, but the positive is we're only choosing between a couple these days and not a dozen.

Reserving any thoughts until this week's Plapp report, though I think ANB, Stretch and Harmes (was the carry-over emergency but was hot in the VFL the week before) will be in the mix. I prefer Stretch over the other two, but I want to see how their reports contrast before choosing. I think the outs will be Salem and Kent. I'd like to see Tim Smith get another run, but he will surely come back through Casey. If they're willing to have a punt on him then I have him in place of Weideman; otherwise I see no option but to persist with Weid.

This feels to me like one of those topics that we heatedly argue about for ages, then he signs a long term deal with his current club in July. Surely he's not going anywhere.

Because our club doctor didn't talk it up.

Next thread: "when does the hyperbole stop?" Look, I hate losing too, but you have a ridiculously short memory if you think anything we have delivered this year is "insipid". You turn a lot of people off bothering engaging with you when you use ridiculously over the top language. Get a grip.

The Hibberd deliberate decision will take some beating.

In a no-pressure, take your time kind of way, I can't wait for Jesse to return.

He even lists a top 10. Jarrod Witts is in it. Whether the oversight was intentional or otherwise, it is credibility destroying. Hibberd is clearly performing well above most of those players and has been in our top 5 consistently since joining the team. Anyway, whatever. I'm long past looking for external plaudits. Hibberd was a fantastic trade and I couldn't be more pleased with his output to date. I knew he was a decent player but so far he's been even better than I anticipated.

The resting ruckman probably made sense right up until the last few years since teams have stopped playing two specialist rucks. It certainly doesn't now though.

Burning the whole state seems a pretty drastic response to one person spitting on your car - as revolting as it is.

You have absolutely no idea, whatsoever, what you are talking about.

He's not going to use the next event to stand on stage and chastise the audience for their selection of guests at the previous event.

Yes - they're the ones that received the letter.

I/C (from): Christian Salem, Dean Kent, Jake Melksham, Sam Weideman, Alex Neal-Bullen, Josh Wagner, James Harmes Melksham, ANB, Harmes in, no outs. A no change extended bench if ever I've seen one.

? I noticed that too.

So how was he supposed to collectively address the members of the Premiership Club without writing a letter?

He didn't go to the press, he wrote it in a letter to his members which someone published. Am I the only one who read the article before getting all outraged?

So what would you have all done if you were Andrew Fagan in this situation? You're the CEO of the club, and you receive several complaints from your premium club members over the behaviour of guests in the club on game day?

If the CEO writing a politely worded letter asking members of an expensive, exclusive club asking members not to invite guests who will upset the experience of other members who have also paid a small fortune to be there is your idea of grandstanding then fair enough mate. I couldn't agree less though. I think people who have paid for an expensive product should expect protection from the CEO if the quality of the product is being degraded. Save the footy banter for the grandstands. Some people don't want that as part of their experience and that is clearly who the Premiership Club is marketed at.

He didn't, he wrote it to the Premiership Club members in a letter.

...which is precisely what he said. Read the letter again.